Educators, take note

There's a debate raging at the UKPG about shorthand and how useful it is. There seems to be a suggestion that it's a waste of time when there's now lots of kit like video and digital recorders to do the job. Well, that just goes to show the danger of handing over journalism training to academics and new media wonks who don't have a clue what the job actually involves.
Fact: most trainee journalists will be sent to cover a court - and without shorthand, you're in trouble. So is your newspaper, TV station or website, if you mangle the facts in this rapid-fire theatre where the exchanges between judge, lawyers and witnesses have no rewind button.
Recording devices are banned in courts. Some say they can report courts with longhand notes- good luck to you. But why not buckle down and actually put some effort in to learn shorthand? The rewards are great - not least, the satisfaction and confidence of knowing you've got rock solid notes - especially when someone tries to challenge your story. Sure, you can sit down with a recorder plonked on the table for a long interview. Just make sure the batteries are working. And make sure you've got enough time to go through it all again. You'll probably have to transcribe the whole tape just so you know what's on it.
And what about when you've got no recording device? All you need is a bit of paper and a pen, and you're still in business. You learned to drive, learned to type, learned a bit of French - so why not learn shorthand? In my view, it's an essential, especially in the proving ground where good journalists pay their dues - the regional media. Or you can blag, bluster and bullshit your way around it. Your choice.